BACKGROUND: The utility of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging in Alzheimer's disease (AD) diagnosis has been well established. Recently, measurement of cerebral blood flow using arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging (ASL-MRI) has shown diagnostic potential in AD, although it has never been directly compared with FDG-PET. METHODS: We used a novel imaging protocol to obtain FDG-PET and ASL-MRI images concurrently in 17 AD patients and 19 age-matched control subjects. Paired FDG-PET and ASL-MRI images from 19 control subjects and 15 AD patients were included for qualitative analysis, and paired images from 18 control subjects and 13 AD patients were suitable for quantitative analyses. RESULTS: The combined imaging protocol was well tolerated. Both modalities revealed similar regional abnormalities in AD, as well as comparable sensitivity and specificity for the detection of AD after visual review by two expert readers. Interobserver agreement was better for FDG-PET (κ: 0.75, standard error: 0.12) than ASL-MRI (κ: 0.51, standard error: 0.15); intermodality agreement was moderate to strong (κ: 0.45-0.61); and readers were more confident of FDG-PET reads. Simple quantitative analysis of global cerebral fluorodeoxyglucose uptake (FDG-PET) or whole-brain cerebral blood flow (ASL-MRI) showed excellent diagnostic accuracy for both modalities, with area under receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.90 for FDG-PET (95% confidence interval: 0.79-0.99) and 0.91 for ASL-MRI (95% confidence interval: 0.80-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that FDG-PET and ASL-MRI identify similar regional abnormalities and have comparable diagnostic accuracy in a small population of AD patients, and support the further study of ASL-MRI in dementia diagnosis.
BACKGROUND: The utility of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging in Alzheimer's disease (AD) diagnosis has been well established. Recently, measurement of cerebral blood flow using arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging (ASL-MRI) has shown diagnostic potential in AD, although it has never been directly compared with FDG-PET. METHODS: We used a novel imaging protocol to obtain FDG-PET and ASL-MRI images concurrently in 17 ADpatients and 19 age-matched control subjects. Paired FDG-PET and ASL-MRI images from 19 control subjects and 15 ADpatients were included for qualitative analysis, and paired images from 18 control subjects and 13 ADpatients were suitable for quantitative analyses. RESULTS: The combined imaging protocol was well tolerated. Both modalities revealed similar regional abnormalities in AD, as well as comparable sensitivity and specificity for the detection of AD after visual review by two expert readers. Interobserver agreement was better for FDG-PET (κ: 0.75, standard error: 0.12) than ASL-MRI (κ: 0.51, standard error: 0.15); intermodality agreement was moderate to strong (κ: 0.45-0.61); and readers were more confident of FDG-PET reads. Simple quantitative analysis of global cerebral fluorodeoxyglucose uptake (FDG-PET) or whole-brain cerebral blood flow (ASL-MRI) showed excellent diagnostic accuracy for both modalities, with area under receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.90 for FDG-PET (95% confidence interval: 0.79-0.99) and 0.91 for ASL-MRI (95% confidence interval: 0.80-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that FDG-PET and ASL-MRI identify similar regional abnormalities and have comparable diagnostic accuracy in a small population of ADpatients, and support the further study of ASL-MRI in dementia diagnosis.
Authors: Andrew B Newberg; Jiongjiong Wang; Hengyi Rao; Randel L Swanson; Nancy Wintering; Joel S Karp; Abass Alavi; Joel H Greenberg; John A Detre Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2005-08-03 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: John C Morris; Sandra Weintraub; Helena C Chui; Jeffrey Cummings; Charles Decarli; Steven Ferris; Norman L Foster; Douglas Galasko; Neill Graff-Radford; Elaine R Peskind; Duane Beekly; Erin M Ramos; Walter A Kukull Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2006 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Lisa Mosconi; Sandro Sorbi; Mony J de Leon; Yi Li; Benedetta Nacmias; Paul S Myoung; Wai Tsui; Andrea Ginestroni; Valentina Bessi; Mozghan Fayyazz; Paolo Caffarra; Alberto Pupi Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: L Mosconi; R Mistur; R Switalski; M Brys; L Glodzik; K Rich; E Pirraglia; W Tsui; S De Santi; M J de Leon Journal: Neurology Date: 2008-11-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Sudipto Dolui; Marta Vidorreta; Ze Wang; Ilya M Nasrallah; Abass Alavi; David A Wolk; John A Detre Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2017-07-24 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Ozioma C Okonkwo; Guofan Xu; Jennifer M Oh; N Maritza Dowling; Cynthia M Carlsson; Catherine L Gallagher; Alex C Birdsill; Matthew Palotti; Whitney Wharton; Bruce P Hermann; Asenath LaRue; Barbara B Bendlin; Howard A Rowley; Sanjay Asthana; Mark A Sager; Sterling C Johnson Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2012-12-12 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: Daniel O Claassen; Adam J Stark; Charis A Spears; Kalen J Petersen; Nelleke C van Wouwe; Robert M Kessler; David H Zald; Manus J Donahue Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2017-06-19 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Jens Göttler; Christine Preibisch; Isabelle Riederer; Lorenzo Pasquini; Panagiotis Alexopoulos; Karl Peter Bohn; Igor Yakushev; Ebba Beller; Stephan Kaczmarz; Claus Zimmer; Timo Grimmer; Alexander Drzezga; Christian Sorg Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2018-02-12 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Susan N Wright; L Elliot Hong; Anderson M Winkler; Joshua Chiappelli; Katie Nugent; Florian Muellerklein; Xioming Du; Laura M Rowland; Danny J J Wang; Peter Kochunov Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2015-06-24 Impact factor: 5.038